kenwstr wrote:If cyclists were required to pay for their use of the roads, what would be a fair amount?

The maintenance costs of the road network are a product of the distance travelled, weight of the vehicle, speed and the width of road used. A little calculation later shows that a fair price for me to use my bike on the road would be around 0.015% of what I pay for my car. Ie for every $100 I pay to use the car, I would be required to pay 1 cent to use the bike. I'd be happy to pay this but somehow, I suspect the administration costs to the general public would exceed that fair amount. While we are being fair and equitable, we should get a rebate for easing our health care burden off the state through a fitter, healthier lifestyle and perhaps a suddenly shortened life eliminating the burden of palliative care and age pension.

Ken

Don't sell it short. 1c/day to ride, let's be generous and give the rego-arguers some slack. Given that I pay approx. $1100 to 'use' the car (registration, CTP, the mandatory bits), I think 11c/year is a tad low.

kenwstr wrote:If cyclists were required to pay for their use of the roads, what would be a fair amount?

The maintenance costs of the road network are a product of the distance travelled, weight of the vehicle, speed and the width of road used. A little calculation later shows that a fair price for me to use my bike on the road would be around 0.015% of what I pay for my car. Ie for every $100 I pay to use the car, I would be required to pay 1 cent to use the bike. I'd be happy to pay this but somehow, I suspect the administration costs to the general public would exceed that fair amount. While we are being fair and equitable, we should get a rebate for easing our health care burden off the state through a fitter, healthier lifestyle and perhaps a suddenly shortened life eliminating the burden of palliative care and age pension.

Ken

Don't sell it short. 1c/day to ride, let's be generous and give the rego-arguers some slack. Given that I pay approx. $1100 to 'use' the car (registration, CTP, the mandatory bits), I think 11c/year is a tad low.

Jim

This is ridiculous, what about pedestrians that jaywalk, they use bridges, roads and litter rubbish on the streets. Are they going to put a number plate on their back also.

Ross wrote:Pretty much all the cycle cam "accidents" shown in the WotR where the cars turned in front of the cyclists and then the cyclists appeared to collide with them could of been avoided if the cyclists had slown down. Not excusing what the car drivers did, though probably most of them were SMIDSY rather than deliberate, but it looks to me (obviously I wasn't there) that the cyclists had plenty of time to slow and avoid the collision.

OK - I'll put my neck on the line here. Not sure if you're referring to this one, but my accident is the one at 1:10 into the piece. The incident happened on the La Trobe St bike lane on the downhill section between Queen and Elizabeth.

Two things to point out - (1) the argument that things in the mirror are closer than they appear also holds true for helmet cams; (2) my helmet cam actually has a much better view of the road than I do, sitting roughly 15cm higher than eye level. The first I saw of this car was when he was actually entering the bike lane. From that point I had less than 1.5 seconds to wash off what speed I had prior to impact. I have an Airzound but had no opportunity to use it as I was fully on both front and rear brake at the time.

The synchronisation of the lights meant that I would have caught the red on Elizabeth so at the time I was coasting, not pedalling. I reject the suggestion that my speed was a factor in this. I have replayed this footage so many times I've lost count and second-guessed myself on numerous occasions but, short of being at walking pace, I don't believe there was much more I could have done.

What isn't shown in the piece is that the only time the driver looked up the bike lane was in the nanosecond immediately prior to impact. The driver to his credit was apologetic and stated he hadn't seen me, but replaying the footage numerous times, it suggests he just didn't look.

Incidentally, I also run a rear-facing camera and the footage from that angle is much more spectacular.

The car should of gave way to you but I always assume that they cant see me and slow down where there is an opening like that, It shouldn't be this way but I'm on a bike and they are protected by a tin can. These people will left and right hook at any time specially if you don't get eye contact with them, they are mostly in another world.

Cyclists don't make the law. Cyclists don't design or build the roads. Why do they get multimillionaire oddities to pick on cyclists most of whom arn't rich because of the road laws and road conditions. This type of bullying should start by them sticking to the facts and not picking on the vulnerable. I suppose it's always easy to pick on the defenceless isn't it mssrs Hinch and Skaife?

I thought i heard an ad on tv last night for tonight's episode of catalyst - (ABC). Something about the war on the road and cyclists and I thought "here we go again..." but i didn't catch more than that as i was in the next room.

I just googled catalyst and while the episode guide says this week's is about coal mining, there *may* be a cycling story as well. Sorry if that sounds vague guys - I don't want to stir up the pot again.

lobstermash wrote:I was disappointed that ABC's S**tsville express didn't properly cover the cycling option in their transport episode. The commute race home was won by a car going just 28km/h average...

Are you implying that a typical bicycle commuter could beat that average speed?

Not beat that speed, but 20-25km/h, which as far as I can tell is the 'normal' sort of range, is not that many minutes behind... Would certainly blitz the public transport options that the others took.

lobstermash wrote:I was disappointed that ABC's S**tsville express didn't properly cover the cycling option in their transport episode. The commute race home was won by a car going just 28km/h average...

car speed should actually be 7 km/h after accounting for 45 min. gym session to expend the same calories as cycling commuter

lobstermash wrote:I was disappointed that ABC's S**tsville express didn't properly cover the cycling option in their transport episode. The commute race home was won by a car going just 28km/h average...

car speed should actually be 7 km/h after accounting for 45 min. gym session to expend the same calories as cycling commuter

Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

lobstermash wrote:I was disappointed that ABC's S**tsville express didn't properly cover the cycling option in their transport episode. The commute race home was won by a car going just 28km/h average...

car speed should actually be 7 km/h after accounting for 45 min. gym session to expend the same calories as cycling commuter

Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the gym user's change time and shower as well Plus time spent waiting for the machine they want

jules21 wrote:car speed should actually be 7 km/h after accounting for 45 min. gym session to expend the same calories as cycling commuter

Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the gym user's change time and shower as well Plus time spent waiting for the machine they want

Yes, that was always the most irritating thing about gyms (when I still bothered to use them): waiting for someone to finish using a machine. Especially those who'd do a set, leave their towel on the machine, go yack to someone else... grrr . I don't miss gyms.

VRE wrote:Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

Do you also shower before you head off on a ride? If not, then I don't see how a cyclist/jogger showering at the office is any different to everyone else showering at home before driving/using public transport. Yes you do have to get to the office location that amount of time early, but overall prep/transport time isn't changed, just relocated.

VRE wrote:Yes, that was always the most irritating thing about gyms (when I still bothered to use them): waiting for someone to finish using a machine. Especially those who'd do a set, leave their towel on the machine, go yack to someone else... grrr . I don't miss gyms.

you need to swing some free weights near their head and yell at them "get of the $&%*^% machine you %(AT)*(%)$!!!"

VRE wrote:Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

Do you also shower before you head off on a ride? If not, then I don't see how a cyclist/jogger showering at the office is any different to everyone else showering at home before driving/using public transport. Yes you do have to get to the office location that amount of time early, but overall prep/transport time isn't changed, just relocated.

Motorists shower at home before driving to work? Those extra-fragrant colleagues of mine have a real problem, then, if even showers don't fix the stench.

VRE wrote:Ah, but then to be fair, you'd have to include the cyclist's showering and changing time in the cyclist's commuting time . Although I'm pretty sure the cyclist would still win (in monetary terms, also).

Do you also shower before you head off on a ride? If not, then I don't see how a cyclist/jogger showering at the office is any different to everyone else showering at home before driving/using public transport. Yes you do have to get to the office location that amount of time early, but overall prep/transport time isn't changed, just relocated.

Motorists shower at home before driving to work? Those extra-fragrant colleagues of mine have a real problem, then, if even showers don't fix the stench.

I think there may be a key step missing in the pre-work cleaning routine for some of the people you are referring to (assuming that they do shower before work). That being the deodorant step. Deodorant is not an optional choice in an office environment (we'll leave the construction site debate for another day) - it should be mandatory as common courtesy to everyone else. Even if you've soaped yourself raw you still need the deodorant in key places to reduce BO while at work (or even a re-application during work hours).

Summernight wrote:I think there may be a key step missing in the pre-work cleaning routine for some of the people you are referring to (assuming that they do shower before work). That being the deodorant step.

Who is online

About the Australian Cycling Forums

The largest cycling discussion forum in Australia for all things bike; from new riders to seasoned bike nuts, the Australian Cycling Forums are a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.